Thanks a lot Beneroth, You have provided a lot of good information. A number of dimensions to do the comparison - it will take me a couple of more reads before I can assimilate all the information. Regards, Kashyap
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 3:14 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > By the way, the often used the argument "ORM allows to switch from one > (SQL) database to another" is illusory. > > In practice such a switch happens very rarely, and when it does it > usually still needs much debugging and changes to the existing > application because the different DBMS just work to differently even > when they all talk a something similar-looking SQL-dialect, and most > likely some DBMS-specific stuff was used in the application eventually > (even when this means circumventing the ORM). > > Just think what it means that you could switch without any effect from > one database management system to another - it means you very likely > haven't fully utilized the previous DBMS and restricted yourself to the > minimum functionality (lowest common denominator) shared by these very > different SQL implementations. > > These arguments work only for simple cases, so they look nice and > convincing on the powerpoint and marketing material, but they don't > stand the test of reality. > > Kind regards, > beneroth > > On 28.11.19 18:06, C K Kashyap wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > There is a plethora of ORM systems such as ActiveRecords (in > > Ruby/Rails) or Microsoft EntityFramework and similar solutions in > > other languages where Objects are mapped to SQL DB records. > > > > I'd love to know your thoughts about how PicoLisp's approach is > > similar/different from them. > > > > Regards, > > Kashyap > > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subjectUnsubscribe >
